From the monthly archives:

June 2009

Pretty sure this is just a parody [Above the Law]

You’d think if President Obama, the New York Times and the American Association of Justice were all circulating the same number yesterday, it would be more reliable.

June 16 roundup

by Walter Olson on June 16, 2009

  • Legal hazards of beachcombing: “Keeping bald eagle feather could result in a $100,000 fine and year in prison” [BoingBoing; our Sept. 1999 post]
  • “E.U. Condemns America’s Online Gambling Crackdown” [Sullum, Reason "Hit and Run"]
  • Much-loved Stockton, Calif. eatery Chuck’s Hamburgers is menaced by ADA serial litigator, and friends rally to save it [Stockton Record, 4000-member Facebook group]
  • Doomed AF Flight 447 had multiple connections with France (airline, aircraft maker) and Brazil (takeoff, many passengers’ nationality), so of course some American lawyers are hoping to get resulting suits heard in U.S. courts [Bloomberg]
  • Sure takes a lot of lawyering to bring a movie like “Bruno” to the screen [Althouse, WSJ Law Blog, Legal Ethics Forum]
  • Form vs. substance: U.K. historic-preservation edict saves increasingly impractical Victorian bell frames, at expense of 650-year-old bell ringing tradition [Telegraph via Never Yet Melted]
  • All in a day’s (double) work: take city retirement or even disability, then come back in second job [Al Tompkins, Lowell (Mass.) Sun]
  • Can it be? In just about another two weeks your favorite source of legal consternation will turn ten years old [nine years and eleven months or so ago on Overlawyered]

{ 2 comments }

Keeping lawyers busy

by Walter Olson on June 15, 2009

“One federal agency sues another” [Adler at Volokh, Steele at Legal Ethics Forum]

{ 1 comment }

A Seattle lawyer’s online marketing efforts are unlikely to win any prizes for high-mindedness, tact or dignity [Patrick at Popehat]

Confirming earlier reports: “In closed-door talks, Mr. Obama has been making the case that reducing malpractice lawsuits — a goal of many doctors and Republicans — can help drive down health care costs, and should be considered as part of any health care overhaul, according to lawmakers of both parties, as well as A.M.A. officials.” One positive factor for reformers: presidential aide Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel has written that there is “no doubt” that “monumental change” in the malpractice system is called for. [New York Times]

In 2004, Obama was quoted as saying, “Anyone who denies there’s a crisis with medical malpractice insurance is probably a trial lawyer”. Other coverage here, here (Ted at PoL, taking skeptical view) and here. The Times characterizes former Senate leader Tom Daschle as being these days “a strong proponent of linking evidence-based medicine with protections against lawsuits”; it’s not clear how new this development is, or how comfortably it meshes with Daschle’s role as a reliable longtime ally of organized trial lawyers (cross-posted at Point of Law). More: Sean Alfano, CBS “Political HotSheet”; Max Kennerly (on proposal’s lack of clarity); Carter Wood @ ShopFloor (if this is meant as more than a bargaining chip, shouldn’t the Obama administration be looking askance at expanded medical-device liability?).

{ 6 comments }

Cherry-baggers beware

by Walter Olson on June 15, 2009

An expensive seasonBy this point there have been emphatic denials from many official quarters that the new food safety bills getting serious attention in Congress will pose any undue burden to small, localized, or specialty food enterprises (see discussion here, here, here, here, here, etc.). And yet even one prominent advocate of the new legislative push, food poisoning attorney Bill Marler, is expressing unease about the effects on small enterprise of one of the major bills, HR 759. Among other provisions, it would finance some government safety efforts by slapping a $1,000 fee on all “food facilities”, farmers alone excepted. More on the bill: Northeast Organic Farming Association, Food Law Blog. And: lawmakers at markup indicate willingness to cut fee from $1,000 to $500 (Naomi Starkman, Civil Eats; for a quick guide to other food blogs predictably differing from many views found in this space, see this post at Bitten).

New U.K. campaign from Sense About Science, building on widespread outrage over the British Chiropractic Association’s lawsuit against Simon Singh (via Bad Astronomy; earlier).

{ 3 comments }

Protect “a letter to [a] girlfriend [stating] that a prison officer had sex with a cat” but do not protect mailing a prosecutor “a note written on toilet paper” saying “Dear Susan, Please use this to wipe your ass, that argument was a bunch of shit! You[rs] Truly, George Morgan.” (Morgan v. Quarterman (5th Cir. 2009)). W.C., sending us the case, comments, perhaps only semi-facetiously:

(i) He said “very truly yours.” Maybe he was trying to help her. He was at least sincere.

(ii) I wouldn’t mind doing a similar stunt to opposing in a case I have currently. I too would do so from a helpful perspective. Is that so wrong?

{ 3 comments }

Oops dept.

by Walter Olson on June 13, 2009

The lead plaintiff in Alli v. Decker, an ACLU-led class action lawsuit aimed at preventing the deportation of various aliens who commit crimes, turns out to be a conman who played a role in a huge Nigerian-led identity theft scam. Reports the Times:

The news media campaign was all set to go. There was even a Web site ready with a sympathetic profile of Alexander Alli, 49, the man the American Civil Liberties Union had chosen as the lead plaintiff …Court documents tell the story of Mr. Alli’s life before his fall as a familiar tale of immigrant pluck, luck and hard work.

Well, yes, court documents prepared by his lawyers would tend to do that, while tending to downplay or omit the massive identity theft operation in which Mr. Alli was a participant, which extracted more than $50 million by impersonating and victimizing some 30,000 credit card holders: he “admitted to being personally responsible for $70,000 to $120,000 of the multimillion-dollar losses to banks and credit card companies”. Start deporting people like that, and where is our next generation of scam artists supposed to come from? [New York Times, Patrick at Popehat]

{ 2 comments }

Gov. Jodi Rell has signed legislation reorganizing the long-criticized system, which handles child custody matters and conservatorships as well as wills and estates; Hartford Courant columnist Rick Green had made the cause a crusade with horror stories. More: Connecticut Law Tribune (cross-posted from Point of Law).

{ 1 comment }

June 12 roundup

by Walter Olson on June 12, 2009

  • Judge in Van Buren County, Michigan won’t approve adoptions unless one parent promises to stay home [Ken at Popehat]
  • Critical view of proposed Performance Rights Act, under which radio would pay new fees to artists and copyright owners [Jesse Walker, Reason]
  • Student threatens to sue school district: “You can say she was an exotic dancer and she was 18, but it was not an equal relationship.” [Boston Herald, columnist Margery Eagan, Worcester Telegram]
  • More attention for U.S. Chamber’s movie trailers promoting awareness of lawsuit abuse [NY Times]
  • Train didn’t actually strike her car at dicey RR crossing after gate closed behind her, but New York woman’s suing Metro-North anyway for the bad scare [Westchester, N.Y. Journal-News]
  • Uh-oh: Defamation-and-privacy section of American Association of Law Schools keeps electing as leaders feminist lawprofs known for speech-restrictionist views [Greenfield, earlier]
  • Cows and vows don’t mix: Oregon county says weddings may not be held on farm-zoned land [KTVZ]
  • Paul Offit, author of noteworthy book Autism’s False Prophets, sued by anti-vaccine blogger [Confutata (scroll), Alyric, link to complaint (PDF) at Courthouse News]

{ 3 comments }

Installments 3 and 4 of the ER doctor’s saga deal with his preparation for being deposed, and the deposition itself (earlier).

Not a misprint: the arbitration award in Chester v. iFreedom Communications Inc., (PDF), in favor of a former chief marketing officer fired without cause, was really $4.1 billion with a b. [Dennis Westlind, World of Work via Ohio Employer's Law; JAMS, Los Angeles]

P.S.: A commenter at an Alabama site: “So much for mandatory binding arbitration always favoring the big company.”

P.P.S.: More on how it happened, including serious lapses by the defendant in responding to the action, from AmLaw Litigation Daily, National Law Journal, and Daniel Schwartz.

{ 6 comments }

At her great new site, Free Range Kids, Lenore Skenazy hears from a reader in suburban Texas who reports that parents wishing to attend their class holiday party are required to undergo a volunteer background check. Many of her commenters have similar stories — and worse.

{ 3 comments }

By reader acclaim: ESPN’s Rick Reilly is righteously hacked off at California serial litigator Alfred Rava and his sex discrimination settlement over an Oakland A’s breast cancer promotion which gave out floppy sun hats on Mother’s Day to women attending the game but not (horrors) to men. (”Make $100 the sleazy way“):

So how many guys have lined up to get their rightful floppy-hat-equivalent payment that was stolen from them by those selfish Mother’s Day-manipulating women? “Well, I haven’t taken a single call so far,” said the 1-888 operator at the firm handling claims. “And I’m here just about every day.”

Earlier coverage of Rava’s Oakland suit here, and on his earlier suit over an Anaheim Angels Mother’s Day tote bag giveaway here, here, here, and here.

{ 4 comments }

bikepostermichelinThe Bicycle Product Suppliers Association has played a role (PDF) in the fight against CPSIA’s (presumably inadvertent) ban on kids’ bicycles; it’s also been dealing with a controversy in the New Jersey legislature over a proposed ban on quick release wheels. But now the legal bills are coming due: “In fact, the expenses associated with these issues could ultimately surpass the association’s entire annual budget of approximately $100,000,” said BPSA president John Nedeau [Bicycle Retailer].

{ 3 comments }

Sean McGinn of Brooklyn, and lawyers seeking class-action status, say Match.com left canceled profiles up, resulting in “humiliation and disappointment” suffered by paying members who sent love-struck missives to the old accounts. [New York Post, Obscure Store, Eric Turkewitz, Above the Law]

{ 4 comments }